4 ms·

On government salary-capped architects and engineers? DoD is never going to be able to pay what any of the major companies can for top-tier talent. And there

by ethbro 7y ago

On government salary-capped architects and engineers? DoD is never going to be able to pay what any of the major companies can for top-tier talent. And there are only so many talented people willing to work below market rate for other reasons. (Not at all a slight to those engineers doing government work. Salutes to all of you!)

ryacko 7y ago
DoD pays for top tier talent when it is a priority. Thousands work as contractors for JPL or the Battelle Institute. The government is currently structure so that only cutting edge research is a priority, not the more humdrum stuff like day to day operations.
Supermancho 7y ago
> On government salary-capped architects and engineers? You mean for the design? Yes. For the actual actual day-to-day operational duties, it's servicemen that perform like any other military post.
YawningAngel 7y ago
Obviously there are lots of ways you can vitiate your ability to do this by being pathologically dysfunctional, all I'm saying is that the proposition isn't a priori unreasonable. Your objection seems flawed to me in that it ignores the fact that goons can screw up just as badly on AWS as they can in a data centre.
- ethbro 7y ago
  Apples to apples, how does a hypothetically goonish IT department screw up a managed service in the same way they can building up from bare metal?
  - YawningAngel 7y ago
    My first thought is spaffing huge piles of money up the wall by using expensive stuff like DynamoDB really inappropriately, but I think in general AWS is complicated in a way paying someone to plug in colo servers isn't and thus offers more scope to waste money. For random anecdata purposes, I saved $20k /month turning off unused stuff at my ~$50k /month most recent gig. Now scale that up to $1B /year
    - ethbro 7y ago
      Absolutely on wasted money and an easier path to financially foot-gunning. But my point was more that managed services do make it harder to technically foot-gun. When there are limited options exposed by an abstraction layer, there are limited mistakes an ignorant user can make.

by ethbro 7y ago

ryacko 7y ago

DoD pays for top tier talent when it is a priority. Thousands work as contractors for JPL or the Battelle Institute. The government is currently structure so that only cutting edge research is a priority, not the more humdrum stuff like day to day operations.

Supermancho 7y ago

> On government salary-capped architects and engineers? You mean for the design? Yes. For the actual actual day-to-day operational duties, it's servicemen that perform like any other military post.

YawningAngel 7y ago

Obviously there are lots of ways you can vitiate your ability to do this by being pathologically dysfunctional, all I'm saying is that the proposition isn't a priori unreasonable. Your objection seems flawed to me in that it ignores the fact that goons can screw up just as badly on AWS as they can in a data centre.

ethbro 7y ago
Apples to apples, how does a hypothetically goonish IT department screw up a managed service in the same way they can building up from bare metal?
- YawningAngel 7y ago
  My first thought is spaffing huge piles of money up the wall by using expensive stuff like DynamoDB really inappropriately, but I think in general AWS is complicated in a way paying someone to plug in colo servers isn't and thus offers more scope to waste money. For random anecdata purposes, I saved $20k /month turning off unused stuff at my ~$50k /month most recent gig. Now scale that up to $1B /year
  - ethbro 7y ago
    Absolutely on wasted money and an easier path to financially foot-gunning. But my point was more that managed services do make it harder to technically foot-gun. When there are limited options exposed by an abstraction layer, there are limited mistakes an ignorant user can make.